________________
ca after a word ending with anusvāra. In the last two Acts the MSS. always read a in such a case Similarly the Sanskrit word eva appears as evva in the first five and as jevva in the last two Acts Again mahānuḥāva and vibhusana of the former portion appear as mahanubhava and vihisana in the latter. In declension, the genitive singular maha (=mine), which is not to be met with in the first five Acts, is to be found in the last two, though side by side with me The locative singular termination mmi appears only in the last two Acts 1
5 I would also like to add the metrical irregularity in the word vidrävita in VI. 27 d, the like of which is not to be met with elsewhere in his works 2
4 CRITICAL PRINCIPLES FOLLOWED IN CONSTITUTING THE TEXT.
In view of the existence of the three different Recensions of a portion of the drama, what method, it may be asked, have I followed in framing the text? Having decided that the Recension A is authentic, I adopted it in the text and relegated the texts of the other Recensions to the Appendices. In the adoption of readings for the portion from V 46 to the close of Act V, I have given preference to the readings of the MSS. I, and E, to the former because it is the oldest, and to the latter because it is the copy of an old MS. and because it has a more or less independent value.
But what principles have I followed in constituting the text for that portion which is common to the MSS. of all the three Recensions, 1 e Acts I to V. 46? Now for this portion the MSS divide themselves into two Groups, the Northern and the Southern, the latter representing the original and the former the revised text of the play, as I have said before. I have consequently adhered to the readings of the Northern Group, and in that Group, too, to those of the Subdivision No 4, comprising the MSS. Cu, K and E, which are the oldest and represent the oldest text I have totally avoided the dangerous and unscientific principles of eclecticism, of picking up the best readings from the MSS. of different Groups or of different recensions Though in about half-a-dozen cases I was forced to adopt the readings of the Southern Group (the readings of the MSS of the Northern Group giving no sense), yet even these few cases I have taken care duly to point out in the Illustrative Notes. With regard to Acts VI and VII also (which, however, I was half inclined to exclude from the text as being spurious) I have adopted a similar method, though due
2 Vide paragraph on 'His Metres' below.
1 For 1eferences see paragraph on 'His knowledge of Prakrits' below
